kansalerpoi_eng.srt

1
00:00:03,500 --> 00:00:07,000
bripre the fourth episode

2
00:00:07,100 --> 00:00:10,900
The dictator

3
00:00:11,000 --> 00:00:24,400
This is a nonfictional work. Any resemblance to actual organizations or persons, living or dead, is purely natural.

4
00:00:25,900 --> 00:00:30,800
Chapter: The beginning of affairs.

5
00:00:30,900 --> 00:00:38,300
We #lojban IRC people are experts in Lojban.

6
00:00:38,400 --> 00:00:43,500
Agree, but the official grammar is not useful.

7
00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:46,900
The official grammar is not important.

8
00:00:47,000 --> 00:00:52,700
The Lojban community is governed by us #lojban IRC people.

9
00:00:52,800 --> 00:00:58,000
Agree, we experts are free to modify the grammar.

10
00:00:58,100 --> 00:01:05,400
Agree. Let's modify Lojban of us, by us, for us!

11
00:01:05,600 --> 00:01:09,100
(hand clap)

12
00:01:09,200 --> 00:01:13,000
I make the name words be tanru units (unit of a sequence of words to be a predicate)!

13
00:01:13,100 --> 00:01:18,100
I make the connectives be in Selpahi's system!

14
00:01:18,200 --> 00:01:23,000
Add new function words and new parts of speech!

15
00:01:23,100 --> 00:01:28,000
Nice, but don't add the words created by Curtis Franks, bah!

16
00:01:28,100 --> 00:01:31,000
Really, nobody use them.

17
00:01:31,100 --> 00:01:33,500
Roger!

18
00:01:33,600 --> 00:01:36,600
The part of speech ZOhOI is done!

19
00:01:36,700 --> 00:01:40,100
Also the part of speech MEhOI is done!

20
00:01:42,500 --> 00:01:49,600
Oh no, new grammar! Our official grammar is great for me.

21
00:01:49,700 --> 00:01:53,400
Agree, no need of modification.

22
00:01:53,500 --> 00:02:02,000
I've exerted to acquire the official grammar. I don't want to learn the new grammar.

23
00:02:03,800 --> 00:02:10,600
The grammar of #lojban IRC is indeed the grammar of modern dialects of Lojban.

24
00:02:10,700 --> 00:02:14,000
I should teach that.

25
00:02:25,500 --> 00:02:27,200
Completed.

26
00:02:28,200 --> 00:02:31,100
Oh, no!

27
00:02:31,200 --> 00:02:37,300
Chapter: Citation of Gleki and #lojban IRC people begins from here.

28
00:02:38,300 --> 00:02:42,400
“The La Gleki's Crash Course (CC)”.

29
00:02:42,500 --> 00:02:47,000
It teaches La Bangu to beginners.

30
00:02:47,100 --> 00:02:57,000
Conflicts with CLL Lojban that break past usage: Here are the differences of modern dialects of Lojban from the language described in CLL. These conflict with what was described in CLL.

31
00:02:57,100 --> 00:03:01,100
This syntactic parser is to be used for La Bangu.

32
00:03:01,200 --> 00:03:07,200
Oh, no, Gleki invaded the official website!

33
00:03:08,300 --> 00:03:14,300
Oh, Gleki completely lacks the procedure of the Language Planning Committe.

34
00:03:14,400 --> 00:03:25,000
Moreover, that parser lacks any information about its creator and is put on the official website.

35
00:03:25,100 --> 00:03:33,600
It should deceive Lojban speakers into believing that that parser is approved by the official body.

36
00:03:35,800 --> 00:03:38,100
I'm sad.

37
00:03:38,200 --> 00:03:40,500
Oh, what happened?

38
00:03:40,600 --> 00:03:43,000
See the part of speech ZOhOI!

39
00:03:43,100 --> 00:03:48,100
You see that implies that Polynesians must be out of Lojban country.

40
00:03:48,200 --> 00:03:52,400
It's first time I tell you: my grand mother is a Polynesian.

41
00:03:54,100 --> 00:03:56,000
I explain.

42
00:03:56,100 --> 00:04:01,400
The parts of speech ZOhOI and MEhOI are labels to a non-Lojban word.

43
00:04:01,500 --> 00:04:11,200
It is said that a non-Lojban word is separated from the nearby words by a pause or a glottal stop.

44
00:04:11,300 --> 00:04:20,000
However, Polynesian languages include words that include glottal stops.

45
00:04:20,100 --> 00:04:27,500
There are therefore some Polynesian words that the parts of speech ZOhOI and MEhOI cannot be labels to.

46
00:04:27,600 --> 00:04:34,500
For example, "zo'oi `ul`uli" ("`" is a sign for a glottal stop in Hawaiian language, which is transcripted into a period "." in ASCII notation of Lojban language.)

47
00:04:39,000 --> 00:04:51,800
Therefore, the parts of speech ZOhOI and MEhOI conflict with the concept of neutrality described in the Section 1.1 of the Complete Lojban Language (book).

48
00:04:55,500 --> 00:04:58,900
What a pity. Don't be agonized!

49
00:04:59,000 --> 00:05:03,000
I believe that #lojban IRC people don't intend to hurt you.

50
00:05:03,100 --> 00:05:09,200
Hopelessly, it seems that #lojban IRC people lack the concept of neutrality,

51
00:05:09,300 --> 00:05:19,500
but other than the parts of speech ZOhOI and MEhOI are not very bad to Lojban speakers.

52
00:05:19,600 --> 00:05:22,500
Euh, I don't know.

53
00:05:22,600 --> 00:05:31,600
By the way, the #lojban IRC grammar does not inherit all the beautiful things from Zasni Gerna (Temporal Grammar) of Xorxes,

54
00:05:31,700 --> 00:05:33,800
why?

55
00:05:33,900 --> 00:05:38,500
Probably, the beauty is not important for #lojban IRC people.

56
00:05:38,600 --> 00:05:42,900
I observe, it inherited only something useful to #lojban IRC people.

57
00:05:43,000 --> 00:05:48,400
I think the official grammar is not very favorable in property of structure.

58
00:05:48,500 --> 00:05:55,500
However, I don't want to obey the #lojban IRC grammar, which is ugly to me.

59
00:05:55,600 --> 00:06:02,400
I want to obey another grammar beautiful to me.

60
00:06:02,500 --> 00:06:10,900
Euh, I begin to intend to create a grammar, which I obey.

61
00:06:11,000 --> 00:06:16,600
I will create a syntactic parser that I use.

62
00:06:16,700 --> 00:06:19,400
Nice diversity!

63
00:06:19,500 --> 00:06:28,900
When the function word "jo'au" is in the grammar, there is no reason why there should be only one Lojban grammar.

64
00:06:36,800 --> 00:07:03,700
Yes, using the function word "jo'au", listeners know which version of Lojban the text obeys.

65
00:07:03,800 --> 00:07:30,700
Yes, using the function word "jo'au", listeners know which version of Lojban the text obeys.

66
00:07:42,300 --> 00:08:17,000
I intend to create and create my grammar, which I obey. I intend to create and create my grammar, which is beautiful to me.

67
00:08:18,000 --> 00:08:21,300
Happily, I try to create my grammar.

68
00:08:21,400 --> 00:08:28,600
Euh, I name my syntactic parser "Zantufa (Favorable Parser)".

69
00:08:29,500 --> 00:08:36,500
Section: I will make the numerals and non-numeral letters separated from each other by the structural property.

70
00:08:41,000 --> 00:08:48,000
"bi ny bajra (There are eight 'n's that run.)"

71
00:08:48,100 --> 00:08:50,400
Completed.

72
00:08:52,700 --> 00:08:54,500
I explain.

73
00:08:54,600 --> 00:08:59,700
For example, "8" is a numeral and "n" is a non-numeral letter.

74
00:08:59,800 --> 00:09:06,900
According to the official grammar, "8n" signifies a number.

75
00:09:07,000 --> 00:09:13,800
for example, "bi ny bajra (There are 8*10+n runners,...)"

76
00:09:13,900 --> 00:09:21,900
and, for making "8" and "n" separated from each other, it is necessary to say "boi", for example,

77
00:09:22,000 --> 00:09:30,000
"bi boi ny bajra (There are 8 n-s that run.)"

78
00:09:35,800 --> 00:09:42,300
Section: I will also make the function word "pi'e" belong to the part of speech VUhU

79
00:09:47,000 --> 00:09:53,000
"li pa bi pi'e re vo (18:24)"

80
00:09:53,100 --> 00:09:55,300
Completed.

81
00:09:56,900 --> 00:09:59,200
I explain.

82
00:09:59,300 --> 00:10:06,300
According to the official grammar, "pa bi pi'e re vo (18:24)"

83
00:10:06,400 --> 00:10:09,000
signifies a number

84
00:10:09,100 --> 00:10:18,400
and depends on only the meaning of "pi'e" for the numeral string being cut by "pi'e".

85
00:10:24,300 --> 00:10:30,500
She also moved "pi'e" to VUhU.

86
00:10:30,600 --> 00:10:34,000
Somewhat worse.

87
00:10:34,100 --> 00:10:36,900
Mayhaps so.

88
00:10:40,800 --> 00:10:46,300
Section: I will modify a little the structure of the part of speech SI,

89
00:10:46,400 --> 00:10:51,600
and also make the function words "ze'ei" and "zei" belong to the part of speech SI.

90
00:10:56,200 --> 00:11:04,300
"li zo'e ze'ei pa (a certain number)"

91
00:11:04,400 --> 00:11:11,100
"mi zei tcita ("me"-label)"

92
00:11:11,200 --> 00:11:14,000
Completed.

93
00:11:15,700 --> 00:11:17,200
I explain.

94
00:11:17,300 --> 00:11:24,900
According to the official grammar, the function word "si" removes syntactic structure of one preceeding word

95
00:11:25,000 --> 00:11:31,500
for example, "oi si coi (Oh dear, oops, Hello!)",

96
00:11:31,600 --> 00:11:37,000
and the function word "zei" makes the two words a tanru unit (unit of a sequence of words to be a predicate),

97
00:11:37,100 --> 00:11:45,900
for example, "vanci zei coi (Is evening greeting.)"

98
00:11:46,000 --> 00:11:50,900
According to Zantufa, the function word "si" is unchanged,

99
00:11:51,000 --> 00:12:01,100
and the function words "zei" or "ze'ei" connects the meaning of one preceeding word and the syntactic structure of one following word,

100
00:12:01,200 --> 00:12:08,900
for example, "vanci zei coi (Good evening!)"

101
00:12:18,300 --> 00:12:26,500
Aha, Zantufa made the function words "zei" and "ze'ei" belong to the part of speech SI.

102
00:12:26,600 --> 00:12:29,700
Yes, great.

103
00:12:35,300 --> 00:12:42,200
Section: I see the part of speech SA penetrates various structures like a net.

104
00:12:42,300 --> 00:12:45,800
It is very ugly.

105
00:12:45,900 --> 00:12:53,500
Agree, but there is no way for the part of speech SA being simple in structure.

106
00:12:53,600 --> 00:13:01,700
Though even that ugly structure is not satisfactory for what users want.

107
00:13:01,800 --> 00:13:08,300
I remember Xorxes also said that or something similar.

108
00:13:08,400 --> 00:13:13,600
I think, when the part of speech LOhAI is in the grammar,

109
00:13:18,500 --> 00:13:21,000
the part of speech SA is not necessary.

110
00:13:21,100 --> 00:13:32,100
"do pa sanji tu lo'ai pa sa'ai ba le'ai (you, a knower, that, s/pa/ba/ )"

111
00:13:32,200 --> 00:13:34,500
It parses like this,

112
00:13:34,600 --> 00:13:43,000
and then a semantic parser will analyse it like "do ba sanji tu (you will be aware of that.)"

113
00:13:43,100 --> 00:13:50,500
Agree, the part of speech SA is unaware that the function word "pa" is replaced by the function word "ba" like that.

114
00:13:50,600 --> 00:14:02,100
For example, "do pa sanji tu sa ba sanji tu (you, a knower, that -sorry, will be aware of that.)"

115
00:14:02,200 --> 00:14:04,700
Aha!

116
00:14:04,800 --> 00:14:09,300
I will make my grammar clean of the part of speech SA.

117
00:14:23,100 --> 00:14:29,900
I believe the part of speech SA shows ugliness.

118
00:14:30,000 --> 00:14:36,400
I believe the part of speech SA bothers my grammar.

119
00:14:36,500 --> 00:14:43,200
I say "good-bye!" to the part of speech SA.

120
00:14:43,300 --> 00:14:47,500
I lack the part of speech SA, as I desire.

121
00:14:47,600 --> 00:14:49,800
Joy!

122
00:14:50,300 --> 00:14:55,000
Completed, it became much simple and beautiful.

123
00:14:55,900 --> 00:15:00,900
Section: I will modify the structure of connectives.

124
00:15:05,500 --> 00:15:13,300
"joi gi ti gi ta gi tu (this, that and that over there)"

125
00:15:16,000 --> 00:15:18,200
I explain.

126
00:15:18,300 --> 00:15:25,200
According to the official grammar, forethought connectives span over only two items,

127
00:15:25,300 --> 00:15:32,200
for example, "joi gi ti gi ta (this and that)".

128
00:15:37,000 --> 00:15:50,400
"Walk, swim or fly, and sing and dance."

129
00:15:52,500 --> 00:15:54,400
I explain.

130
00:15:54,500 --> 00:16:02,600
According to the official grammar, the function word "gi'i" belongs to the part of speech GIhA, and signifies interrogative,

131
00:16:02,700 --> 00:16:12,400
for example, "do cadzu gi'i se relxilma'e (do you walk or ride a bike?)"

132
00:16:12,500 --> 00:16:19,100
According to Zantufa, the function word "gi'i" is replaced by a string of function words "ji cu",

133
00:16:19,200 --> 00:16:29,500
for example, "do cadzu ji cu se relxilma'e (do you walk or ride a bike?)"

134
00:16:29,600 --> 00:16:39,200
and the function word "gi'i" belongs to the part of speech GIhI and is a terminator of forethought connectives.

135
00:16:43,100 --> 00:16:52,500
"gi pu bo ba jersi ta gi surla (before future chasing, I take a rest.)"

136
00:16:54,700 --> 00:16:57,200
I explain.

137
00:16:57,300 --> 00:17:06,200
According to the official grammar, the function word "pu" of a forethought connective is put only before the function word "gi",

138
00:17:06,300 --> 00:17:14,600
for example, "pu gi ba jersi ta gi surla (before future chasing, I take a rest.)"

139
00:17:14,700 --> 00:17:20,800
According to Zantufa, the function word "pu" is put before or after the function word gi.

140
00:17:24,200 --> 00:17:25,400
Completed.

141
00:17:26,000 --> 00:17:36,900
My forethought connectives are useful for various syntactic structures.

142
00:17:37,000 --> 00:17:45,200
My forethought connectives has the power to span over any plural number of items.

143
00:17:45,300 --> 00:17:53,800
There is no reason why the forethought connectives must always span over two items.

144
00:17:53,900 --> 00:17:57,800
Here, there, over there, over there, there and here I go.

145
00:17:57,900 --> 00:18:02,500
This, that, that over there, that over there, that and this are chosen.

146
00:18:10,300 --> 00:18:18,600
There is no reason why the forethought connectives must always span over two items.

147
00:18:18,700 --> 00:18:22,600
This, that, that over there, that over there, that and then this I meet.

148
00:18:22,700 --> 00:18:28,300
This, that, that over there, that over there, that and then this salutes.

149
00:18:34,400 --> 00:18:36,700
Oh dear

150
00:18:36,800 --> 00:18:38,900
Much tinkered.

151
00:18:39,000 --> 00:18:43,500
She repurposed "gi'i"; heh.

152
00:18:43,600 --> 00:18:50,500
huh, she made n-ary "gi"?

153
00:18:50,600 --> 00:18:52,100
Yep

154
00:18:52,200 --> 00:18:57,100
I thought that had really bad ambiguity problems.

155
00:18:57,200 --> 00:19:03,600
I think she fixed it by repurposing "gi'i". Hence the GIhI.

156
00:19:03,700 --> 00:19:12,100
"ta broda je cu brode (that does_1 and does_2.)"

157
00:19:12,200 --> 00:19:18,700
Hm Selpahi-"jecu" works,

158
00:19:18,800 --> 00:19:24,000
but Selpahi-"gu je" doesn't work.

159
00:19:24,100 --> 00:19:32,000
oh, zantufa doesn't have "ga je" either. strange.

160
00:19:32,100 --> 00:19:37,000
It is replaced by "gi je", strangely.

161
00:19:37,100 --> 00:19:43,700
As for the following string, non-Zantufa also has to include the similar thing.

162
00:19:43,800 --> 00:19:50,700
"gi ba bo broda gi brode (after doing_1, doing_2)"

163
00:19:50,800 --> 00:19:57,000
Clearly, it has the same meaning as "ba gi",

164
00:19:57,100 --> 00:20:01,200
but if permitting something like this:

165
00:20:01,300 --> 00:20:11,000
"ba gi ba bo broda gi brode (in future, after doing_1, doing_2)"

166
00:20:11,100 --> 00:20:20,100
"ba gi ba bo broda gi brode gi'i je mo (in future, after doing_1, doing_2, and doing what?)"

167
00:20:20,200 --> 00:20:25,300
I should commit pillage for many things of Zantufa.

168
00:20:25,400 --> 00:20:30,800
Euh, oh, it produces "gu'ek (connective for tanru (the sequence of units for a predicate))".

169
00:20:30,900 --> 00:20:40,000
"ge broda gi brode zo'e gi'i (does_1, and does_2 something)"

170
00:20:40,100 --> 00:20:43,000
Broken?

171
00:20:45,800 --> 00:20:47,800
Ah, I made a mistake.

172
00:20:52,800 --> 00:21:01,000
"ge broda gi brode zo'e gi'i (does_1, and does_2 something)"

173
00:21:01,100 --> 00:21:03,000
Completed reparing.

174
00:21:03,100 --> 00:21:08,300
Thanks to the #lojban IRC user who found the bug.

175
00:21:08,800 --> 00:21:14,900
Section: the grammar is concordant with study of logic.

176
00:21:15,000 --> 00:21:25,300
According to the philosophy of Quine, a formula in the structure constructed by the part of speech NU is referencially opaque.

177
00:21:25,400 --> 00:21:34,000
I think therefore a proposition signified by a formula in NU-structure...

178
00:21:34,100 --> 00:21:40,300
and a proposition signified by a formula out of NU structure...

179
00:21:40,400 --> 00:21:48,000
do not always have a common universe of discourse.

180
00:21:48,100 --> 00:21:59,200
Motivated by that, I gave a full logical power to the universe of discourse of NU-structure.

181
00:21:59,300 --> 00:22:09,500
In other words, NU-structure contains a complete formula, that is called a statement in Lojban grammar.

182
00:22:12,100 --> 00:22:18,000
"nu mo .i bo mo (event of doing what, doing what)"

183
00:22:18,100 --> 00:22:22,500
Ah!! I think it is not at all correct.

184
00:22:22,600 --> 00:22:25,800
Intended, though.

185
00:22:25,900 --> 00:22:30,500
The function word "i" is text's main concept.

186
00:22:30,600 --> 00:22:36,000
The function word "i" moves the readers to th 0-th layer,

187
00:22:36,100 --> 00:22:41,700
but according to Zantufa, it ceases moving.

188
00:22:41,800 --> 00:22:46,600
Similar to "gek (the forethought connectives)" in property of incompatibility.

189
00:22:46,700 --> 00:22:55,300
So la zantufa implemented JE CU and repurposed "gi'i",

190
00:22:55,400 --> 00:23:03,400
but did not implement GA JE and GU JE

191
00:23:03,500 --> 00:23:09,400
Wait maybe zantufa took a different approach...

192
00:23:09,500 --> 00:23:16,600
"je gi broda gi brode (doing_1 and doing_2)"

193
00:23:16,700 --> 00:23:24,000
"gi je broda gi brode (doing_1 and doing_2)"

194
00:23:24,100 --> 00:23:28,000
Two versions are approved.

195
00:23:28,100 --> 00:23:35,300
Ah. How does it distinguish between tanru (sequence of units for a predicate) and bridi (predicate relationship; the speaker confuses it with a formula) forethought though?

196
00:23:35,400 --> 00:23:43,500
"gi je cu broda gi cu brode (does_1 and does_2)"

197
00:23:43,600 --> 00:23:53,000
I don't know. I tried to make a parser parse in the form of non-tanru forethought and to fail.

198
00:23:53,100 --> 00:23:57,500
Sorry, I meant "tried to make that, and failed."

199
00:23:57,600 --> 00:24:10,300
Oh. "gi je broda gi brode zo'e gi'i je cu mo (does_1 and does_2 something, and does what?)"

200
00:24:10,400 --> 00:24:16,500
Bah, Zantufa uses a secret connective system.

201
00:24:16,600 --> 00:24:19,900
I remember there may be the explanation.

202
00:24:20,000 --> 00:24:24,800
learning by brute force, aha!

203
00:24:29,600 --> 00:24:33,000
Oh no, I made again a mistake.

204
00:24:38,000 --> 00:24:46,800
"gi je broda gi brode zo'e gi'i je cu mo (does_1 and does_2 something, and does what?)"

205
00:24:46,900 --> 00:24:49,900
Completed reparing.

206
00:24:55,400 --> 00:25:01,000
"lo nu broda i bo brode (the event of doing_1, doing_2)"

207
00:25:01,100 --> 00:25:03,300
Magic!

208
00:25:03,400 --> 00:25:06,900
I don't like it.

209
00:25:07,000 --> 00:25:13,900
It conflicts with Gleki's "i bo", though.

210
00:25:18,500 --> 00:25:22,700
What is Gleki's "i bo"?

211
00:25:22,800 --> 00:25:31,900
Gleki says that it is a way of adding a structure of the part of speech UI after completing a sentence.

212
00:25:32,000 --> 00:25:38,400
I observe, it is taught in the Crash Course,

213
00:25:38,500 --> 00:25:47,100
for example, "do pu sidju mi i bo ui (you helped me; happy.)"

214
00:25:47,200 --> 00:25:49,000
Ah, I see.

215
00:25:49,100 --> 00:25:59,300
I observe, that structure is conjunction of a sentence and a vacancy by "i bo".

216
00:25:59,400 --> 00:26:10,400
Generally, the meaning of "ui" spans over the function word "bo" or the vacancy, not over the preceding text.

217
00:26:10,500 --> 00:26:21,600
Agree. What is taught by Gleki is not concordant with the standard scope system of free modifier of Lojban.

218
00:26:21,700 --> 00:26:31,500
Gleki may want that the meaning taught above is a special property of "i bo ui" among free modifiers.

219
00:26:31,600 --> 00:26:40,400
Why Gleki does not use the function word "vau" in order to add a UI-structure?

220
00:26:40,500 --> 00:26:47,100
Maybe the reason is that "vau" terminates an atomic formula, not a complete formula,

221
00:26:47,200 --> 00:26:54,600
for example, "mi jinvi lo du'u ta mulno vau ui (I think that is completed with happiness.)"

222
00:26:54,700 --> 00:27:04,400
is different from "mi jinvi lo du'u ta mulno vau vau ui (I think that is completed, happy.)"

223
00:27:04,500 --> 00:27:16,800
I see. I will try later another way of scope of "ui" following after a complete formula.

224
00:27:18,500 --> 00:27:20,500
Oh, deplorable!

225
00:27:20,600 --> 00:27:25,600
now she's gone too far

226
00:27:25,700 --> 00:27:29,900
I should create Maltufa (Deplorable Parser) :p

227
00:27:30,000 --> 00:27:33,300
Everything belongs to UI.

228
00:27:33,400 --> 00:27:36,000
lo'u zei gentufa (Out-of-Structure Parser).

229
00:27:36,100 --> 00:27:37,900
Aha.

230
00:27:38,000 --> 00:27:45,000
"lo nu broda .i je brode (the event that it does_1 and that it does_2)"

231
00:27:45,100 --> 00:27:54,500
if "i" doesn't start a new sentence... oi oi oi

232
00:27:54,600 --> 00:27:59,700
Hm yeah I see a problem

233
00:27:59,800 --> 00:28:04,800
it basically eliminates elidible terminators

234
00:28:04,900 --> 00:28:09,000
I don't really use "i bo",

235
00:28:09,100 --> 00:28:16,800
but "i je" might be problematic

236
00:28:16,900 --> 00:28:23,400
"lo nu broda .i brode (the event that it does_1. It does_2.)"

237
00:28:23,500 --> 00:28:28,000
so it breaks compositionality as well

238
00:28:28,100 --> 00:28:31,600
NU/NOI is extremely common

239
00:28:31,700 --> 00:28:44,600
and I fear a large amount of text would be broken by changing the semantics of "i" after abstractions.

240
00:28:44,700 --> 00:28:48,200
Changing the semantics of "i" after abstractions would be disastrous, which is why you'd need to explicitly use "tu'e".

241
00:28:48,300 --> 00:29:02,800
For example, "i mi djica lo nu tu'e do klama lo mi zdani i ba bo mi'o samkei kansi'u tu'u (I want that you come to my house and then we play games together.)"

242
00:29:04,900 --> 00:29:11,700
What a pity! TUhE-structure is not what is called a sentence in Lojban grammar, which is an atomic formula.

243
00:29:11,800 --> 00:29:20,000
Therefore, it is not contained in NU-structure of the official grammar or #lojban IRC grammar.

244
00:29:20,100 --> 00:29:24,800
As for Zantufa, there is no problem.

245
00:29:24,900 --> 00:29:37,100
"i mi djica lo nu tu'e do klama lo mi zdani i ba bo mi'o samkei kansi'u tu'u (I want that you come to my house and then we play games together.)"

246
00:29:41,200 --> 00:29:46,300
Like this, "tu'e" is essentially acting as LU,

247
00:29:46,400 --> 00:29:51,400
but the result of which is not a sumti (argument of predicate), but a bridi (predicate relationship; the speaker confuses it with a formula).

248
00:29:54,500 --> 00:30:01,200
That is false. Precisely, it is not an atomic formula but a complete formula.

249
00:30:03,200 --> 00:30:09,000
Well, zantufa currently goes further than that.

250
00:30:09,100 --> 00:30:13,200
Ah, I had missed that. Sorry.

251
00:30:13,300 --> 00:30:19,300
Then I suppose I'm not a big fan of zantufa, aha!

252
00:30:20,100 --> 00:30:32,000
What a pitty! The #lojban IRC people seem to be unable to distinguish a complete formula from an atomic formula.

253
00:30:32,100 --> 00:30:39,600
But maybe being unable to do it is not characteristic of #lojban IRC people only.

254
00:30:39,700 --> 00:30:45,000
But #lojban IRC people generally rebel too much against logic.

255
00:30:45,100 --> 00:30:47,000
Calm down.

256
00:30:47,100 --> 00:30:52,600
Anyone is free to prefer anti-logical dialects of Lojban.

257
00:30:52,700 --> 00:30:59,600
You also, you have not yet explain your dialect being concordant with study of Logic.

258
00:30:59,700 --> 00:31:09,200
I define a complete formula as a formula that is completed by the speaker.

259
00:31:09,300 --> 00:31:13,900
To complete saying a formula is

260
00:31:14,000 --> 00:31:23,600
to make a mapping from a formula to a proposition that has a certain truth-value in the universe of discourse.

261
00:31:23,700 --> 00:31:34,900
For example, to complete a formula "cy morsi ijonai cy xrukla (C is dead XOR C comes back)"...

262
00:31:35,000 --> 00:31:46,100
is to make a mapping from the whole formula to a complex proposition that has the truth value "1" in the universe of discourse.

263
00:31:46,200 --> 00:31:59,700
In that context, the speaker does not assert any truth value of those two atomic formulas connected by the connective.

264
00:31:59,800 --> 00:32:06,900
That is to say, the speaker assert neither whether C is dead, nor whether C comes back.

265
00:32:07,000 --> 00:32:16,400
Therefore, from a point of view of study of logic, the function word "i" followed by a connective does not terminate a complete formula.

266
00:32:16,500 --> 00:32:21,600
#lojban IRC people lack the concept of study of logic like that.

267
00:32:21,700 --> 00:32:34,300
From a point of view of truth-value, the function word "i" with a connective is different from "i" alone in meaning.

268
00:32:34,400 --> 00:32:42,600
As I said at 21m15s of this movie,

269
00:32:42,700 --> 00:32:55,700
I think that the inside of NU-structure and the outside of it do not always have a common universe of discourse.

270
00:32:55,800 --> 00:33:09,300
Therefore, it seems to me insane to prevent use of afterthought connectives for signifying a truth in the universe of discourse of NU-structure.

271
00:33:09,800 --> 00:33:18,700
Well, it is not very rational from a point of view of study of logic, setting aside whether it is insane.

272
00:33:18,800 --> 00:33:32,700
It's also ugly that NU structure is not recursive at the part of afterthought connectives of a string that signifies a truth.

273
00:33:32,800 --> 00:33:41,000
"broda i ja brode (doing_1 or doing_2)"

274
00:33:41,100 --> 00:33:49,400
"nu broda i ja brode (event of doing_1 or doing_2)"

275
00:33:49,500 --> 00:34:03,000
"nu nu broda ija brode kei ija nu broda ija brode (event of event of doing_1 or doing_2 or event of doing_1 or doing_2)"

276
00:34:03,100 --> 00:34:11,000
Feeling of solidarity. However, I believe that the concepts of logic and beauty are not important for #lojban IRC people.

277
00:34:11,100 --> 00:34:15,500
They are different from us in what is important.

278
00:34:15,600 --> 00:34:18,900
Don't be angry about that.

279
00:34:19,000 --> 00:34:22,000
Roger, sorry.

280
00:34:24,700 --> 00:34:30,400
I kinda like the "gi'i" thing though.

281
00:34:30,500 --> 00:34:38,900
Even though it does break some old constructs that rely on it being binary.

282
00:34:39,000 --> 00:34:41,100
Agree.

283
00:34:41,200 --> 00:34:44,400
What is this "gi'i"?

284
00:34:44,500 --> 00:34:48,500
terminator for n-ary "gi"

285
00:34:51,000 --> 00:34:59,700
Joy, some features of Zantufa are not much deplorable to even #lojban IRC people.

286
00:35:00,100 --> 00:35:06,200
Section: the part of speech KE of the official grammar is not neat in property of structure.

287
00:35:06,300 --> 00:35:13,900
Motivated by that, I made the KE-structure of Zantufa neat.

288
00:35:14,000 --> 00:35:15,700
OK.

289
00:35:17,300 --> 00:35:18,800
I explain.

290
00:35:18,900 --> 00:35:21,300
According to the official grammar,

291
00:35:21,400 --> 00:35:29,600
"broda gi'e ke brode gi'a brodi ke'e (does_1 and [does_2 or does_3])"

292
00:35:29,700 --> 00:35:32,000
is grammatical,

293
00:35:32,100 --> 00:35:41,800
but "ke broda gi'e brode ke'e gi'a brodi ([does_1 and does_2] or does_3)"

294
00:35:41,900 --> 00:35:44,300
is ungrammatical.

295
00:35:44,400 --> 00:35:50,000
Zantufa grammar is a result of removing that bug.

296
00:35:50,100 --> 00:35:58,600
"ke broda gi'e brode ke'e gi'a brodi ([does_1 and does_2] or does_3.)"

297
00:36:06,000 --> 00:36:13,000
"ke po'o lo broda cu brode (only the doing_1 does_2.)"

298
00:36:13,100 --> 00:36:15,700
ah I see

299
00:36:15,800 --> 00:36:19,200
This is an extension of "ke",

300
00:36:19,300 --> 00:36:24,400
first developed to do stuff like this

301
00:36:24,500 --> 00:36:30,000
so how can we fix camxes-exp (parser for #lojban IRC users) to parse this :)

302
00:36:30,100 --> 00:36:41,100
because zantufa has some other problematic features that disqualify it for general use

303
00:36:41,200 --> 00:36:44,500
Yeah I know T.T

304
00:36:44,600 --> 00:37:00,000
note: gleki's new favorite construction "i bo UI" breaks under zantufa's deplorable change to "i"

305
00:37:04,700 --> 00:37:11,600
Aha, #lojban IRC people seem to want to get something from Zantufa grammar.

306
00:37:11,700 --> 00:37:17,700
Agree, they get only useful things, not the main concept.

307
00:37:17,800 --> 00:37:27,700
Just like they ignored the simple and beautiful things of Zasni Gerna (Temporal Grammar) of Xorxes.

308
00:37:27,800 --> 00:37:32,800
Really, #lojban IRC people lack philosophy.

309
00:37:32,900 --> 00:37:37,800
Because of that, their grammar is ugly.

310
00:37:37,900 --> 00:37:42,800
But the ugly-to-you is favorable to #lojban IRC people.

311
00:37:42,900 --> 00:37:48,100
As I said before, it's only that you and they are different from each other in what is favorable.

312
00:37:50,000 --> 00:37:53,600
Section: I don't need the part of speech SE,

313
00:37:53,700 --> 00:38:02,400
because I permit the part of speech FA to have power to span over sumti (argument of predicate) XOR tanru unit (unit of a sequence of words to be a predicate).

314
00:38:02,500 --> 00:38:06,000
I will make the part of speech SE replaced by the part of speech FA.

315
00:38:06,100 --> 00:38:10,400
I expect the grammar will be much simple.

316
00:38:15,700 --> 00:38:22,500
For example, "fe ta tavla (talks to that)"

317
00:38:22,600 --> 00:38:29,400
has the same meaning as "ta fe tavla (talks to that)".

318
00:38:29,500 --> 00:38:36,800
And also "fa joi fe mi'o tavla (we talk to each other)"

319
00:38:36,900 --> 00:38:43,700
has the same meaning as "mi'o fa joi fe tavla (we talk to each other.)"

320
00:38:43,800 --> 00:38:48,100
Simply speaking, they mean that we discuss.

321
00:38:48,200 --> 00:38:52,400
Good-bye, the part of speech SE! Tee-hee!

322
00:38:53,100 --> 00:38:58,500
The part of speech FA was a tag on sumti (argument of predicate).

323
00:38:58,600 --> 00:39:04,200
The part of speech FA of me is a tag on tanru unit (unit of a sequence of words to be a predicate).

324
00:39:04,300 --> 00:39:14,000
The part of speech FA of me will be a tag on tags XOR connectives.

325
00:39:14,100 --> 00:39:20,300
Good-bye, the part of speech SE! Tee-hee!

326
00:39:20,400 --> 00:39:22,900
Hey, Mankant!

327
00:39:23,000 --> 00:39:26,600
Attention, Mankant!

328
00:39:26,700 --> 00:39:36,000
That is not concordant with the past texts in the property of structure of tag of tags or connectives.

329
00:39:36,100 --> 00:39:43,100
For example, "fe va'u (official: something_1, benefitting from something_2 / zantufa: for the benefit of something_1)"

330
00:39:43,200 --> 00:39:51,100
and "fe gu ra gi ri (official: that, no matter whether this / zantufa: no matter whether that, this)"

331
00:39:51,200 --> 00:40:00,600
Agree, but the function words "ku" and "ke" help the tag of tags and the tag of connectives, respectively.

332
00:40:00,700 --> 00:40:08,500
Look, "fe ku va'u (something_1, benefitting from something_2)".

333
00:40:08,600 --> 00:40:16,000
Also, "fe ke gu ra gi ri (that, no matter whether this)".

334
00:40:16,100 --> 00:40:20,800
Agree, I only made you aware of much difference,

335
00:40:20,900 --> 00:40:28,600
because you have been try to make it enough concordant with texts according to the official grammar.

336
00:40:28,700 --> 00:40:33,600
You may decide as you like, though.

337
00:40:33,700 --> 00:40:36,800
OK.

338
00:40:36,900 --> 00:40:39,000
Euh, yes,

339
00:40:39,100 --> 00:40:53,000
the part of speech FA as a tag of tags or connectives implies being different from the official grammar in logical structure at the part of terms.

340
00:40:53,100 --> 00:40:58,600
Euh, for now, I cannot decide.

341
00:40:58,700 --> 00:41:08,000
I permit for now that the part of speech SE is not yet replaced by the part of speech FA, only in the properties of tag of tags or tag of connectives.

342
00:41:13,000 --> 00:41:21,000
"se va'u i fe va'u (for the benefit of something_1; something_1, benefitting from something_2)"

343
00:41:21,100 --> 00:41:31,000
"se gu ra gi ri i fe gu ra gi ri (no matter whether that, this; that, no matter whether this)"

344
00:41:31,100 --> 00:41:39,000
Though, in the far future, I want to make the parts of speech SE and FA be completely mixed in one.

345
00:41:39,100 --> 00:41:43,500
It would be the favorable parser extreme, aha!

346
00:41:43,600 --> 00:41:45,900
Aha!

347
00:41:48,000 --> 00:41:57,900
And lol Zantufa... she repurposed FA for "to'ai/vo'ai/xo'ai"

348
00:41:58,000 --> 00:41:59,400
wat

349
00:41:59,500 --> 00:42:01,700
Yes

350
00:42:01,800 --> 00:42:05,000
What would the rafsi (combining form for the word) be even :p

351
00:42:05,100 --> 00:42:14,000
Ah, lol. rafsi: faq feq fiq foq fuq

352
00:42:14,100 --> 00:42:15,600
lol

353
00:42:15,700 --> 00:42:18,800
nah I don't like that

354
00:42:18,900 --> 00:42:22,500
it seems useful at first

355
00:42:22,600 --> 00:42:27,800
but it's way inconsistent. conflicts with tag unification.

356
00:42:31,000 --> 00:42:35,900
Section: the structure of the part of speech SEI is strange.

357
00:42:36,000 --> 00:42:42,700
It is different from the structure of the part of speech LE in the property of how many terms it includes.

358
00:42:42,800 --> 00:42:50,000
For example, "sei ca ku ta tu ti sfubu (—now, that dives to over there from here—)"

359
00:42:50,100 --> 00:42:57,300
and "le ti pa sfubu (one diver of this)".

360
00:42:57,400 --> 00:43:04,000
Moreover, it is different from the structure of the part of speech NU in the property of whether it includes an atomic formula.

361
00:43:04,100 --> 00:43:12,400
For example, "sei ca ku ta sfubu tu ti (—now, that dives— that over there, this)"

362
00:43:12,500 --> 00:43:20,300
and "nu ca ku ta sfubu tu ti (event of 'now that dives to over there from here')"

363
00:43:20,400 --> 00:43:26,100
On the one hand, COI-structure is similar to LE-structure,

364
00:43:26,200 --> 00:43:32,800
and TO-structure is similar to LU-structure.

365
00:43:32,900 --> 00:43:41,300
On the other hand, SEI-structure is not harmonious with the other structure in the grammar.

366
00:43:41,400 --> 00:43:48,900
Therefore, it is good to make SEI-structure harmonious with NU-structure.

367
00:43:49,000 --> 00:43:58,500
And then, new "soi" of Selpahi should belong to the part of speech SEI of Zantufa.

368
00:44:03,300 --> 00:44:14,500
"mi sei la'a do na sanji ke'a cu dasni lo cnino se panci (I —maybe you are not aware of it— wear new perfume.)"

369
00:44:14,600 --> 00:44:17,000
Completed.

370
00:44:17,100 --> 00:44:19,900
No, I am aware of it, aha!

371
00:44:20,000 --> 00:44:21,600
Aha!

372
00:44:23,300 --> 00:44:27,200
This would be absolutely devastating.

373
00:44:27,300 --> 00:44:31,200
"sei" is very similar to LE

374
00:44:31,300 --> 00:44:36,000
and that's the simplicity of the grammar.

375
00:44:36,100 --> 00:44:40,600
I don't see any need in changing it,

376
00:44:40,700 --> 00:44:46,500
what is more the current grammar of SEI is more advantageous to me.

377
00:44:49,000 --> 00:44:56,600
Gleki seems not to understand that the part of speech SEI is between the parts of speech LE and LU in the property of form.

378
00:44:56,700 --> 00:45:09,600
If you need a function word that has the meaning of sei and the form similar to LE, add a new function word to the part of speech COI.

379
00:45:12,000 --> 00:45:19,700
I'm afraid Zantufa things will soon really cease to be Lojban language, seriously or not.

380
00:45:19,800 --> 00:45:21,800
Agree.

381
00:45:23,500 --> 00:45:29,700
They seem not to be afraid that their own dialects cease to be Lojban language,

382
00:45:29,800 --> 00:45:32,000
why?

383
00:45:32,100 --> 00:45:38,000
Then I believe that they think that their own dialects are still Lojban language.

384
00:45:38,100 --> 00:45:41,900
How egocentric they are!

385
00:45:42,000 --> 00:45:53,000
Well, in any case, it is not rational that they are afraid of a dialect that is not spoken by themselves.

386
00:45:53,700 --> 00:46:04,100
Section: I will add the part of speech IAU so that the part of speech UI following a text should span over a complete formula.

387
00:46:04,200 --> 00:46:11,100
Simply speaking, "i bo" of Gleki is replaced by it, isn't it?

388
00:46:11,200 --> 00:46:12,800
Yes.

389
00:46:17,800 --> 00:46:28,500
"ta taske i je ti ckaji lo ka friti lo djacu iau ui (That one is thirsty, and this one has property of offering water, happy!)"

390
00:46:28,600 --> 00:46:30,400
Completed.

391
00:46:30,500 --> 00:46:36,100
You see, "i bo" of Gleki is replaced by the function word "iau".

392
00:46:36,200 --> 00:46:37,700
Yes.

393
00:46:37,800 --> 00:46:46,000
Moreover, it is concordant with study of logic that the function word "iau" terminates only a complete formula.

394
00:46:46,100 --> 00:46:48,200
Nice.

395
00:46:50,400 --> 00:46:57,300
"ke ti ta ke'e ja tu ([this, that] or that over there)"

396
00:46:57,400 --> 00:46:59,800
Strange.

397
00:46:59,900 --> 00:47:06,000
"fa ke ti ta ([this, that])"

398
00:47:06,100 --> 00:47:12,000
Zantufa became out-of-structure parser, non-seriously.

399
00:47:12,100 --> 00:47:14,700
Not at all.

400
00:47:14,800 --> 00:47:21,500
"ti ge ta mo gi tu mo (this does what that, and this does what that over there?)"

401
00:47:21,600 --> 00:47:23,200
!

402
00:47:23,300 --> 00:47:28,600
freakin' Jbofi'e (a parser of official YACC grammar) can parse that

403
00:47:28,700 --> 00:47:34,500
shame, zantufa, shame :)

404
00:47:34,600 --> 00:47:36,800
lol

405
00:47:39,900 --> 00:47:44,300
Oh, no, I made again a mistake.

406
00:47:44,400 --> 00:47:48,500
Oh, #lojban IRC people are too much impolite.

407
00:47:48,600 --> 00:47:52,800
Mankant, don't be agonized!

408
00:47:52,900 --> 00:47:57,700
I'm not agonized by those who lack philosophy.

409
00:48:02,600 --> 00:48:08,800
"ti ge ta mo gi tu mo (this does what that, and this does what that over there?)"

410
00:48:08,900 --> 00:48:11,400
Completed reparing.

411
00:48:13,300 --> 00:48:17,900
In Zantufa, the function word "ce'e" belongs to the part of speech BO,

412
00:48:18,000 --> 00:48:20,000
but what is the profit?

413
00:48:20,100 --> 00:48:27,300
What can be the meaning of something like "mi je ce'e do"?

414
00:48:27,500 --> 00:48:33,200
From a point of view of Zantufa, I want to remove the function word "ce'e",

415
00:48:33,300 --> 00:48:45,000
but I permit "ce'e" be in the grammar in order to parse a text in the official grammar that includes "ce'e".

416
00:48:45,100 --> 00:48:50,400
There is no meaning of "mi je ce'e do".

417
00:48:50,500 --> 00:48:55,600
"ro mo ge mo gi mo (everything that how does what and does what)"

418
00:48:55,700 --> 00:48:59,400
I think it is not correctly parsed.

419
00:48:59,500 --> 00:49:02,200
The official asserts it:

420
00:49:02,300 --> 00:49:08,700
"ro mo ge mo gi mo (every what does what and does what?)"

421
00:49:08,800 --> 00:49:18,800
From a point of view of Zantufa, the function words belonging to the part of speech GUhA is not necessary, and they became function words of the part of speech GA.

422
00:49:18,900 --> 00:49:24,800
"ro mo cu ge mo gi mo (every what does what and does what?)"

423
00:49:24,900 --> 00:49:31,500
or "ro mo ge cu mo gi mo (every what does what and does what?)"

424
00:49:31,600 --> 00:49:38,500
has the structure similar to that of the official grammar, though not the same.

425
00:49:40,900 --> 00:49:42,700
I explain.

426
00:49:42,800 --> 00:49:50,700
On the one hand, according to the official grammar, the part of speech GUhA spans over tanru (sequence of units for a predicate), and the part of speech GA does not,

427
00:49:50,800 --> 00:49:58,900
for example, "ge gu'a crino gi xunre gi sinxa (it is green or red, and is signal.)"

428
00:49:59,000 --> 00:50:13,200
By the way, The parts of speech GA and GUhA of the official grammar span over only two items, therefore "ge" spans over "sinxa", "gu'a" does not.

429
00:50:13,300 --> 00:50:20,000
On the other hand, according to Zantufa, the part of speech GA spans over tanru (sequence of units for a predicate), too,

430
00:50:20,100 --> 00:50:30,200
for example, "ge ga crino gi pelxu gi xunre gi cu sinxa (it is green, yellow or red, and is signal.)"

431
00:50:34,100 --> 00:50:40,800
That is, PEG is more powerful than YACC in describing grammar,

432
00:50:40,900 --> 00:50:51,500
so the part of speech GUhA of YACC grammar is not necessary any more for the grammar described in PEG, is it?

433
00:50:51,600 --> 00:50:53,300
Exactly.

434
00:50:55,100 --> 00:51:01,800
So, Zantufa language is enough different from Lojban language.

435
00:51:04,300 --> 00:51:08,000
Chapter: Result of the affairs

436
00:51:09,100 --> 00:51:17,200
Oh, Gleki also says that your language is not Lojban language.

437
00:51:17,300 --> 00:51:21,800
Oh, he also pushes my language out of the set of Lojban languages.

438
00:51:21,900 --> 00:51:31,100
Howerver, I remember that Gleki taught beginners that #lojban IRC dialects are modern Lojban.

439
00:51:31,200 --> 00:51:32,300
Feeling of solidarity.

440
00:51:32,400 --> 00:51:37,500
Anyone may opine that what is Lojban language, and what is not,

441
00:51:37,600 --> 00:51:41,500
but the following matter is really problem:

442
00:51:41,600 --> 00:51:55,200
Gleki uses the official website account and the official-pretending accounts in order to publish his own opinion.

443
00:51:55,300 --> 00:52:07,400
That fact misleads anyone interested in Lojban into believing that Gleki's opinion is the official opinion.

444
00:52:07,500 --> 00:52:16,900
I put up with #lojban IRC people assert that #lojban IRC dialects are Lojban and Zantufa is not Lojban.

445
00:52:17,000 --> 00:52:21,100
Continue your terms of abuse on Zantufa!

446
00:52:21,200 --> 00:52:27,300
However, it is intolerable that Gleki uses the official or official-pretending accounts.

447
00:52:27,400 --> 00:52:33,600
It results in Lojban language being uniformly #lojban IRC dialects.

448
00:52:33,700 --> 00:52:41,400
It results in my loosing my place in Lojban community.

449
00:52:41,500 --> 00:52:47,400
Really violent and dictator, Gleki is.

450
00:52:47,500 --> 00:52:49,900
I will never forgive him.

451
00:52:59,200 --> 00:53:04,000
Sung in Zantufa dialect.

452
00:53:04,100 --> 00:53:10,200
Do you feel the color fissure?

453
00:53:10,300 --> 00:53:17,800
Much rational according to every preferable syntactic form.

454
00:53:17,900 --> 00:53:24,100
"Deplorable, deplorable!"

455
00:53:24,200 --> 00:53:32,600
said who was once a friend of mine.

456
00:53:32,700 --> 00:53:38,800
Do you feel the color fissure?

457
00:53:38,900 --> 00:53:46,500
Much rational according to every preferable syntactic form.

458
00:53:46,600 --> 00:53:52,900
"You cease to be Lojbanic."

459
00:53:53,000 --> 00:54:01,500
said who was once a friend of mine.

460
00:54:01,600 --> 00:54:08,200
Do you feel the color fissure? (color-fissure)

461
00:54:08,300 --> 00:54:15,500
Much rational according to every preferable syntactic form.

462
00:54:15,600 --> 00:54:21,900
"I am indeed the norm."

463
00:54:22,000 --> 00:54:30,200
said who was once a friend of mine.

464
00:54:44,700 --> 00:54:51,100
Do you feel the color fissure?

465
00:54:51,200 --> 00:54:58,900
Much rational according to every preferable syntactic form.

466
00:54:59,000 --> 00:55:05,100
I said "This is my language."

467
00:55:05,200 --> 00:55:13,400
to who was once a friend of mine.

468
00:55:13,500 --> 00:55:19,900
Do you feel the color fissure?

469
00:55:20,000 --> 00:55:27,600
Much rational according to every preferable syntactic form.

470
00:55:27,700 --> 00:55:33,800
I said "You expelled me."

471
00:55:33,900 --> 00:55:42,200
to who was once a friend of mine.

472
00:55:42,300 --> 00:55:48,900
Do you feel the color fissure? (color-fissure)

473
00:55:49,000 --> 00:55:56,400
Much rational according to every preferable syntactic form.

474
00:55:56,500 --> 00:56:02,600
I said "Farewell to you."

475
00:56:02,700 --> 00:56:11,000
to who was once a friend of mine.

476
00:56:25,400 --> 00:56:31,800
Do you feel the color fissure?

477
00:56:31,900 --> 00:56:39,600
Much rational according to every preferable syntactic form.

478
00:56:39,700 --> 00:56:45,900
If there is a bridge across the color fissure,

479
00:56:46,000 --> 00:56:58,800
then you'll be again a friend of mine.

480
00:56:58,900 --> 00:57:09,500
—There is no bridge.

481
00:57:17,300 --> 00:57:18,900
End

482
00:57:19,000 --> 00:57:20,700
not yet.

483
00:57:22,100 --> 00:57:28,000
You will make this movie show finished in the following way.

484
00:57:28,100 --> 00:57:32,600
Below is spoken in Zantufa dialect version 1.17.

485
00:57:32,700 --> 00:57:36,900
Every line is spoken by Guskant,

486
00:57:37,000 --> 00:57:45,500
but I want the lines of other than Bripre or Mankant to be spoken by others.

487
00:57:45,600 --> 00:57:59,600
Chose one of the roles, record the lines in your voice, and send the sound recording to Bripre or Guskant.

488
00:57:59,700 --> 00:58:06,500
I will make the proper lines of the movie be replaced by your voice.

489
00:58:06,600 --> 00:58:20,100
I want, but don't expect, that the lines of #lojban IRC people or Gleki will be spoken by the original writer of the lines.

490
00:58:20,200 --> 00:58:32,900
When all lines of other than Bripre or Mankant are spoken by other than Guskant, the movie show is finished.

491
00:58:33,200 --> 00:58:35,600
End of the way of finishing the movie show.

492
00:58:35,700 --> 00:58:38,100
Thank you helpers in advance.